 |
 |
Good morning, I asked a while ago about motion correction with two subvolumes and the best choice seemed to be to fill the anatomical gap between subvolumes with appropriate amount of slices filled with zeros. Thus, those bonus-slices should not enter parameter estimation because of intensity thresholding and so on. I did that but strangely enough, I had "results" also from those zero-slices. Another case is such that analysis gives "normal" results and zeroslices seem to be avoided in analysis. Third case gives "image error"... after FEAT runs contrast_mgr and is "Loading image". Actually, all of these cases have as "filtered_func_data" a volume which has kind of "ghosts" in it. Slice 4 should be zeros, but it's a ghost of slice 3 and slice 7 should be zeros, but it's a ghost of slice 8. Example_func looks always normal. Bet was always turned off. What is happening? Maybe I should treat those subvolumes separately? With best regards, Pasi Tuunanen